Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)BI
Posts
6
Comments
716
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Honestly this is a big problem with being able to criticize Isreal in good faith - it's all too easy to be taken as an antisemite.

    Don't get me wrong, I'm sure loads of antisemites are out there pretending to be concerned about Gaza while actually just using it as an excuse to hate jews - but the OP is describing very real issues - like the thing with Havard just last week where companies were rescinding job offers based on who supported Gaza and condemned Isreal

  • The sequel is literally "the exact same movie as the first one, but this time with water (and bonus animal cruelty)"

    I actually enjoyed the first one, but the second movie added nothing of value and cheapened everything that happened in the first one (in that literally no one gives a shit about unobtanium anymore)

    Edit: Curious as to what the downvoters are taking issue with about my comment. Nothing wrong with liking the movie, but you have to admit the plot was basically identical to the first one, just with new characters and a different setting

  • Read the article - that's really not the case anymore. My wife is a baker, and she makes Vegan deserts all the time, I can tell you first hand that when done well, Vegan deserts are every bit as delicious as "normal" ones

  • I'm not sure "evolution" is on the table for humanity any longer. For one thing, evolutionary pressures don't really exist for humanity, outside of the most undeveloped areas.

    Not making it to "breeding age" (feels weird to say that in the context of humans) doesn't really have anything to do with fitness any longer, more just luck.

    Add in the fact that we basically already have the ability to manipulate human genes - and I think it's far more likely that we'll just start tinkering with our genetic code deliberately, as opposed to what we think of as evolution

  • Framing by the justice system happens all the time. Adult DNA doesn't get there by accident, but DNA results can get falsified on purpose.

    I get that you really want to torture people while feeling morally justified, but consider the fact that torturing convicted criminals doesn't actually help anyone, including the victim, and that you will inevitably wind up torturing an innocent person. Period.

    Like I said, lock 'em up where they can't hurt anyone - but torturing them doesn't do anything except make sadists happy, and I don't think that's what we should be optimizing for in a first world justice system.

  • That makes me think that for you it’s about something more than public safety.

    Yeah, it's been clear from your very first comment that you feel this way lol - you're welcome to disagree with me, but I've already laid out my thoughts on the matter multiple times. Unless you have anything new to add, instead of just repeating the same fallacies about the data being "worthless", then I don't see any value in continuing to talk in circles

  • you should also err on the side of “not maiming those people” because the chances are some of them are innocent.

    This was more or less my point, though frankly I don't know that I totally agree that a false negative is "far worse". Getting a false conviction as a child sexual offender is practically a death sentence in prison, and even if it's not, it's certainly enough to ruin that persons life forever. We're talking about an actual human here. I'm really not sure what it is about children that make people so perfectly OK with throwing away the lives of scores of adults just to keep one child from harm.

    Mind you, I'm not advocating that we should let all offenders go free for the sake of keeping any innocents out of prison, but personally I'd rather let several guilty men go free for a crime than see one innocent person have their lives ruined purely due to the bad luck of being in the wrong place at the wrong time and the incompetence of our justice system. Though I recognize that that's no doubt a controversial opinion. Especially as no one ever believes that they themselves will be falsely convicted of something.

  • Do you have a way of determining with 100% accuracy which is which? Because if so, holy shit dude, you need to share that shit with the world - you could single handedly revolutionize global justic, what the fuck are you doing just posting about it on Lemmy???

  • You are though.

    I'm not, reread my previous comment. Last time I'm going to say this before I just block you without giving you the courtesy of even replying, stop deciding for me what I'm advocating, I've laid out the strategy I'd like to see in my previous comment, I'm advocating for absolutely no action beyond that.

    So pitbulls will still breed even if you tell people not to do it.

    Yes, of course - do you actually believe this is where a majority of pitbulls come from though? No moral strategy will completely eliminate the breed, but restricting breeders will mean that your average person can't get one, which means your average Joe/Jane is far less likely to run into them on the street.

    How do you come up with pitbulls having health and aggression issues?

    I never said they have health issues (maybe they do, I'm not aware of it though) - When I talk about breeds with health issues, I'm referring to breeds like Pugs that live their whole lives in discomfort because of how much we fucked up their physiology.

    In over half of all dog bite cases, the breed is unknown

    True, that's why we only look at the cases where the breed is known for these discussions, without making any assumptions about the dogs whose breed is unknown.

    It’s not anyone’s job to count dog bites by breed

    I guess true? In that people don't get paid, they do however report breed information as part of the reporting of the dog bite. And as I've said in other comments in this thread, I'm entirely sure that there is a margin of error in the reporting of breeds for dog bites. However, even if you assume as much as a 5x overreporting for pitbulls, that still puts at about double the chance of an individual pitbull biting someone as opposed to a mixed breed dog.

    anyone purporting to have done so is basically lying.

    Ah, the ole "I don't like it, so it must be made up", very scientific.

  • Realistically, ever justice system is going to have to compromise between between the ease of incarcerating actual criminals and the likelihood of a false conviction, I don't think it'd be possible to build a system where absolutely 0 innocent people get convicted of crimes they didn't commit - unless it also was unwilling to convict actual offenders

  • As with any legal punishment, it's always necessary to acknowledge that no matter how heinous the crime, some portion of people who are sentenced for that crime, will in fact be innocent.

    I'd much much much rather not have a single innocent person be subjected to this, just so I can feel smug that some sick fuck "got what they deserved". Lock em up where they can't hurt anyone and call it a day. Cruel and usual punishments help absolutely no one in the end

  • And when you talk about banning dog breeds, yes you are talking about rounding them up in euthanizing them. Period.

    I'm absolutely not. I'm advocating restrictions on breeders, not owners. No one should have their dog taken away, and pit bulls in shelters should still be adoptable in my view. I just don't believe we should be deliberately breeding more dogs with known issues, whether it's issues with their own health (like pugs) or issues with aggression.

    Please don't presume to tell me what I'm advocating.